Extensive organizational reforms in the 1990s characterized the Swedish school system and the upper secondary school is still in a period of change. Not unlike other developed countries, the growth in the demand of higher education to get access to the labor market, urges almost all pupils leaving the compulsory school to continue their education. However, intermittently analyses and reports show that the target achievement is insufficient (Skolverket, 2007). One out of three pupils leaves the upper secondary school without a school-leaving certificate after the three years´ education. There are also dropouts and some pupils do not complete their education. To realize the idea of being a school for all, the upper secondary school has to cope with the whole variation of pupils, in view of their different backgrounds and abilities. Plenty of meetings, verbal and social, where several school actors communicate and interact constitute the daily work. These communicative contexts can be formal (e.g. tuition, different conferences) as well as informal (talks in the corridors, staffrooms, etc.). The aim of the study, to be presented, is to map out, describe, analyze and interpret the interaction and sense-making within and between the communicative contexts which are intertwined through complex networking. What are the consequences of the interaction and actions within and between these contexts for framing of pupils´ school situation and for formulating and negotiating possible assistance? One crucial question is how the students experience and understand their school situation, their participation, the communication in different contexts and their own process of learning. The starting point for the research is the communicative relation-directed perspective, founded on a series of empirical studies (Ahlberg, 2001; Ahlberg, Målqvist & Welin, 2005). It has its roots in the socio cultural perspective (Säljö, 2005; Wertsch, 1998), but it is also influenced by phenomenography (Marton & Booth, 1997). Research within this perspective takes simultaneously into account the school as a societal institution, the social practice and the backgrounds of the individual and his/her ability of learning (Ahlberg, 2007). Difficulties are not located to the individual or the environment, but both of these aspects are to be heeded. The research has an ethnographic approach and was conducted at two different schools. Eleven “case-students” admitted to two different vocational programs were followed through their upper secondary education (2004-2007). Both of these programs also have a study-oriented specialization, preparing for higher education. The collection of data is vast and comprises observations, interviews and documents. The preliminary results point at and confirm the expected complexity characterizing the school practice. Students, who risk by different reasons to fail in achieving the stipulated goals are discussed and talked about in various situations. Despite all conversation, necessary information is left out. The teachers are not sufficiently involved in the communication, decisions and actions elaborated in contexts where other actors are meeting (e.g. pupil social welfare staff) and vice versa. The most obvious result is the lack of talking with the students and the co-operation between pupils, care-takers and school staff is limited. Ahlberg, A. (2001). Lärande och delaktighet. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Ahlberg, A. (2007). Specialpedagogik av igår, idag och imorgon. Pedagogisk forskning, 12 – (2), 84-95. Ahlberg, A., Målqvist, M., & Welin, A. (2005). Verksamhetsförlagd lärarutbildning och specialpedagogisk kunskap. (Insikt 2005:1). Jönköping: Högskolan för Lärande och Kommunikation, Högskolan i Jönköping. Marton, F., & Booth, S.(1997). Learning and Awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Skolverket. (2007). Skolverkets Lägesbedömning 2007. Förskoleverksamhet, skolbarnomsorg, skola och vuxenutbildning. Stockholm: Fritzes. Säljö, R. (2005). Lärande & Kulturella redskap. Om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet. Norstedts Akademiska Förlag. Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Expected Outcomes
The preliminary results point at and confirm the expected complexity characterizing the school practice. Students, who risk by different reasons to fail in achieving the stipulated goals are discussed and talked about in various situations. Despite all conversation, necessary information is left out. The teachers are not sufficiently involved in the communication, decisions and actions elaborated in contexts where other actors are meeting (e.g. pupil social welfare staff) and vice versa. The most obvious result is the lack of talking with the students and the co-operation between pupils, care-takers and school staff is limited.
References
Ahlberg, A. (2001). Lärande och delaktighet. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Ahlberg, A. (2007). Specialpedagogik av igår, idag och imorgon. Pedagogisk forskning, 12 – (2), 84-95. Ahlberg, A., Målqvist, M., & Welin, A. (2005). Verksamhetsförlagd lärarutbildning och specialpedagogisk kunskap. (Insikt 2005:1). Jönköping: Högskolan för Lärande och Kommunikation, Högskolan i Jönköping. Marton, F., & Booth, S.(1997). Learning and Awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Skolverket. (2007). Skolverkets Lägesbedömning 2007. Förskoleverksamhet, skolbarnomsorg, skola och vuxenutbildning. Stockholm: Fritzes. Säljö, R. (2005). Lärande & Kulturella redskap. Om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet. Norstedts Akademiska Förlag. Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.